About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 171 (some duplicates have been removed)
francisco has a substantial interest to promote in compliance with the youth sales law in protecting our children from illegally obtaining tobacco. so just the background of why this law exists. there is a lot of laws that exist, and one that i would really like to highlight is you see the old time law book here is the reason that a retailer if a clerk sells to a minor they get a ticket and it is issued a ticket and a fine that is associated with it and it is for code 308 and a violation of a law that you cannot provide tobacco to a person under 18 years of age. and this is a new law? no. you see this book, it is actually from 1906. so the code, 308 you cannot provide tobacco to a minor, and it has been on the books i think from maybe the 1880s or something, but it was in the 1906 version for your interest. there are a lot of laws that have taken effect since then that reinforce the idea that it is illegal to sell to minors. so, these slides, i cannot necessarily read, but, many members of our comment can, the reason that we put these on is that we understand that many people who work i
in this case and said that they are meeting the letter of the law. so we are going by what is shown on the plans. certainly the board of appeals here in its hearing on this matter and considering all of the facts can consider items in that article and can consider the testimony by all of the parties here in making a decision. we are basing our decision on the plans that are given to us and that are there testifying to and this is what we are going to do and this is what they are going to build and that is what we are expecting them to build if they don't build that and if they exceed the scope, then we will have to review that and come in for a revision permit and may trigger the 317 requirement. >> and in your experience, in the planning department when you see the designs such as this one and you have the evidence that has been presented to us today, understanding what sort of the spirit of the law as well as the technical components and requirements of it, is this something that is of concern to the planning department? where we see the people, i mean, at least from my, what i am
cannot expire without a chance for notice and hearing. so that's due to state case law. so to the extent i think would you always have to have a hearing before officially revoking a permit. regardless of whether it's been extended. >> it's this period where they don't know if they have a permit or not. if you went by the rules and extended for 3 more years or whatever that period, you are still in the same predicament that someone who got a permit and didn't do anything. i think that should be stricken. >> we'll investigate it and talk to the city attorneys office and report back to you with what we can do. >> commissioner border? >> yes. i think this is an issue to get around the 3 year provision because we've seen a lot of cases. what we looked at in the hearing is the extension of the period. i don't know about the older projects because i think it's a little bit more complicated depending on the project and the number of times that people have come back for entitlement and extensions. we would review, we can pull things off the list to review their plans. i think if the issue is pra
and law enforcement can work together on measures that will ensure that certain operators are being a bit more responsible because that creates an issue for everyone else and i think that is where i hope that we go. >> anything else? and by the way, i think who knew that three harvard law grads would be so interested in this issue. i think that is president chiu noted that. >> is there any, anything else that chief? >> no, i think that complete agreement here. we all want to see the city prosper, and the clubs do well, and do the safely and responsibly. >> i think that we are working towards that goal and working closely with the entertainment in doing it. >> why don't we open it up to public comment. any member who would like to speak, please come forward. >> hello, i am stephanie grain berg and i am here representing the cpab as well as the neighbors which is a neighborhood association (inaudible) ininclusive of the troubled long troubled broad way corridor. first of all, thank you for having this hearing, i think that it is very, very important. i am here really to request or plead, if
through the ordinance language. not once does it mention pass through. these are laws which are currently on the books and we believe the process works in our significant meetings we've had with tenant communities and with the ram port, we know there are hardship applications available for disabled and senior citizens and people who can not afford a resident increase in this nature. i know they are one of five organizations that receive funding from san francisco to help people with this process. with a we would like to do and i would like to give credit to supervisors breed for the amendment in the ordinance that there is now amendment for community outreach. this is a broad base piece of legislation which is in a 30 year plan, but to put it in this ordinance is something we need to do with significant outreach to the community, to the existing city departments that are going to be plan checking this, but to really make sure that if someone can't afford to pay for this, there are avenues that someone can take and i'm happy to have you come up to discuss the detail hardship of this proces
by the open records laws, and the sunshine laws and i think in san francisco we haven't talked to the city attorney about that or your counsel about that but the open records laws and sean -- sunshine laws protect them up to appointment so we're not in a situation where every transmission of information is available to the general public. if that is the case or that becomes the case then we change the strategy around a little bit so we can help to protect the identity of the candidates, not necessarily the backgrounds, but the identity of the candidates by still abiding by those laws. >>i think one of the strengths of your team is the tremendous community involvement and searches that you done. i find it interesting to the work you did in l.a. and many nonprofits. my hope is as our diverse communities expect topnotch transportation selection processes like this that we can involve them in as many of the aspects of the profile and the competencies that we can and i welcome a number of stakeholder groups and give you the recommendations as we sit down to one-on-one conversations. >> thank
. >> and at least in spring through june. >> so we will actually have to adopt the change of the bi laws and we can call the meetings every month. >> i would rather keep it special meetings for may, april and, may, i think that once we get through, this, through the budget, i think that meeting at 9:30 will be appropriate. >> i don't want to go through changing the by laws. >> okay. >> that would be my preference >> thank you so much. the staff, and thank you so much to board members and if there are no further announcements are discussions the meeting is adjourned. >> -- to track stolen phones to be used in the field for other investigative purposes. that is approximately 977 dollars. >> you have a memo from the captain in your packets regarding this do nation. ironically to track cell phone thefts. is there anything you'd like to add? commissioners, questions or concerns? and is there any public comment regarding this matter. >> [inaudible] for quite a few times starting when he was the secretary for the police commission. i have a great deal of respect for him. i believe his promotion was w
to properly implement the laws that we have in place to protect the rights of the people involved. we have, as we noted, a bubble ordinance that has been imposed for quite sometime, and we enacted as a board last year a white zone ordinance which we offer to provide additional protections. unfortunately the laws that we've had in place have not been sufficient to protect the women, especially here. demonstrators continue to not only harass and intimidate, but they try to find loopholes in the existing laws. and what we have right now is a last resort attempt to provide some protection to the patients who want to access this clinic and to the men and women who work there. the ordinance that we have -- we are introducing creates a buffer zone, that it provides protection of 25 radius within the entrance of the clinic. it amends the bubble ordinance that was passed by this board in 1993. that bubble ordinance was a good start, but this is needed. let me say that what we are doing is something that we don't do lightly. we recognize the right of people to express free expression, to express the
national academy of elder law attorneys, local northern california chapter. i would bring new blood and new ideas, even though i'm in an old body and i would be very happy to work with [speaker not understood] people. i understand there is some interest in having a woman and a lawyer. i am both. thank you. >> thank you. any questions? seeing none, thank you very much. next person is james illig. i-l-l-i-g. i'm sorry, thank you. next person is james wagoner. >>> good afternoon. i'm a recent law school graduate. i graduated from jfk university school of law last year. and currently i'm honored to be the boardshire fellow in law and aging at bay area legal aid where i started the project for glbt senior advocacy in september and the project is basically concerned with providing legal representation and advice concerning public benefits for lgbt seniors. the project is trying to ensure that lgbt seniors do not -- low-income lgbt seniors do not disappear from our community if something goes wrong with their benefits. and so far we've had some successes and we had some challenges. but the
to reclassifying the property as a higher tax rate that states law allows you to do that as retrofit. additionally we are looking into the loan process and these buildings maybe historic and landmarks. it would require a vote. with the mellow roos, they effectively become the voting body so they get to decide between the group when money is build out for these i am improvements that is repaid for their property taxes and gives them the mechanism without taking a loan individually. that is an interesting feature of it. if these properties change hands. the loan actually goes with it and the person who originated the loan is relieved from the debt. >> then in terms of the actual work that's being done, there was reference made before which is issued that i have been thinking about. in terms of making sure that the process for property openers owners who are complying with the law and somehow got financing and want to do the work and have to get to the planning department and planning of building inspection. what is your competence level that will our policy intent to expedited this process to make
into law the nation's first ban on possession of halopoint ammunition in san francisco. we worked closely with supervisor cohen to introduce this legislation. these extra deadly bullets have no place in our streets. we are also creating an early warning system to alert us when individuals make massive purchases of ammunition, because even if there is a remote possibility we can prevent another tragedy, we are morally bound to do so. and we must support president obama and senator finestien comprehensive effort to reform the gun laws, i support state and federal effort to keep the weapons off of our streets and out of our homes. i have directed our city agencies and law enforcement officials to move towards plans of action, to prioritize and create solutions that impact policy changes and take aggressive actions against the moment egregious types of gun violence and we are working hard and making more plans for more deeper, more wider gun buy back programs and events that will take place later this year. but no single mayor can stop gun violence alone. if we work together, as a city, as a
with the realtor association to make sure that disclosure laws adequately cover this and make sure that people buying and selling these buildings are fully aware of the ordinance requirements and myself and the city staff is here to answer any questions that may come up. thank you. >> thank you, mr. leaney. >> so mr. egan, do you want to present? >> thank you supervisors. control economic developments. our office issued an economic report on this. i will make 3 points about it. first of all, like many forms of legislation it has cost and benefits as the supervisors have mentioned the benefits of this legislation are highly sensitive to the probability of an earthquake. those benefits include future repair cost as has been mentioned for people to be able to stay in their home after an event. certainly improved life safety. these benefits are highly sensitive to earthquake probabilities and based on the numbers from usgs, the most recent numbers we estimate there is about a 2 percent chance of an earthquake and the 2 percent probability alone would justify this immediate spent you sped expendi
for this law bass it is a law that i will like to see pass. the current state of soft story building residents an opportunity -- it's not that -- rather that owners even those that have the desires and resources to make-up grades are stuck in a catch 22 with regards to the pressures they are under in the housing mark. without looking to doing an upgrade seriously those that do remain the suckers as a disadvantage to the peers that do not. what management does is take that a way, 25 percent of the land building owners who were notified and required to do an evaluation did a retrofit. doing it now is inevitable. so why should you do exactly what berkeley did? they haven't passed their mandatory second phase retrofit ordinance yet and now they are the suckers again because of failure of government action to follow through. and only government action can signal to tenants that it's worth paying more for a retrofit unit. we need all stake holders in the environment to receive that. >> thank you very much. next speaker? >> good afternoon supervisors, my name is michael wills. i'm an architect and e
it back to one of my administrative law judges who holds a hearing. the whole process probably takes 2-3 months but in the meantime while that process is going forward, the pass through is stayed and the tenant is not obld obligated to pay. >> it takes 2-3 months to pass this? >> more or less. we have an incentive to expedited this. it would be after a lot of postponement because they are ill or something like that. usually what i do is try and call the other side. call the landlord and say could you please extend this pass through and usually they are cooperative. >> how long would you know this -- how well-known do you think this application is amongst renters? >> we think it's quite well-known because anytime we send a decision that contains a pass through. we send out a memorandum you mean in three languages that refer tenants to organizations to do actual outreach around hardship applications. i will admit, it's not pleasant. tenants, there is no privacy involved. once you say i cannot afford to pay a pass through that the landlord is required to. you have to prove that it you ha
, transportation venues, urs has supported more than 400 of the fortune 500 firms and state, and law law enforcement we have a workforce of over 50,000 individuals and have the much sought after safety act certification. the individuals that we used on the subject matter team and portion of this, they have got a wealth of background, and very indepth, we have phds in there. you have got, structural engineers. pes, hvac, meps, there is a whole range of law enforcement. so we brought a wealth of experience and a lot of people to this particular project. who have good experience with transportation, i should say that all of these individuals have transportation backgrounds as well. >> one of the reasons that urs is in a very good position to look at the transit center is because of our out reach, we have got extraordinary advantage to access and look at threatening information on a daily basis that is due in part to the contracts that we hold. some classified and some open. this access is conducted on a constant basis and we use it to validate the threats so that we know what is going on ev
of you today. we do need to talk about what is the law of the day. this is something that would be articulated in the stimulus possess in the clarification policy that we talked b the principles of the law of the day that a building application must conform to the law of the time of the approval. this is applying regardless of any provisions or what proifthsz provision were or were not in effect. what this means to take for example a project that hypotheticallily received your conditional use for the plan process but that didn't secure a building permit until after the plan's effective date, that building permit will be nonetheless be subject to all current provisions of that plan which can be parking control, use control. it does reflect long stand is advice from the city attorneys office and will apply going forward regardless of either of these two policies. here is our last slide commissioners and before you continue your discussion today we want to remind you on the mechanics of the policies of a single majority of commissioners is required in order to adopt the policies. p
of the rent control law talks about passing through half and it's kept by the property owner. that's kind of fair to me. i can be convinced otherwise, maybe but i don't think so. i like to share between the tenants and the owners. i recommend a half cost pass through. it will also save buildings -- >> thank you mr. berry. next speaker. >> hi, good afternoon. my name is maria. i work with the cause -- the organization based in san francisco mission district and through our work with our members and clients we see a lot of the buildings are in a need of a lot of repairs including seismic retrofitting. we strongly agree that earthquake safety is necessary in our city and it's great that it's such a priority. unfortunately it should not be done at the expense of tenants especially after a hundred percent pass through. the majority of these buildings are under rent control and probably long-term rent control tenants. so an increase of $80 or more would create a situation where tenants would have to leave their units . we want housing safety and security at all levels, that includes earthquake
detail. but essentially the public trust doctrine exist in common law and a few other areas of state law. the port is really support to use these lands to promote meritime commerce and navigation, fisheries and the common law trust exist through a series of court cases, california court cases up through the california supreme court and california attorney general and the state land commissioner and we have the director of the state land commissioner, jennifer is here and i believe she'll participate in public comment. those three entities, the state lands commission and the attorney general's office and the california state system has common laws and rules for this state. there is rules in the california public resource code on how agencies like the court manage our property. one of the big rules is that we have to keep revenues from these land separate from the city's general revenues. where the state has handed over title to trust property to local agency like the city and county acting a the port there is a legislative trust grant. in our case in san francisco we have the burden act p
the united states and i respect the law i want to go with the law but what i see a lot of people going against the law and not following the things. each and every rule helps for the drivers the taxi cab drivers we work with the people we help the people to get the grocery to get appointment to get to the doctor appointment but there's no one there there's no limo must tang for them when people are drunk we take them home. everything happens they can complain about us. but a must tango owe there is ang there is no one. uber there is no one. thank you very much. >> we'll go to about 3 and take a short break at that point. >> mr. chair man at this point rather than continuing to read names i'm going to ask people in this room just to speak up step forward stand upstate your name and we'll just go with that. >> hi what's your name sir? >> the state of california is full of communists and terrorists corruption and -- >> excuse me: >> the current situation calls for new taxes and medallion demand and supply created this business. the evolvement -- san francisco minimum wage and inex
what? i really want to talk to you about that. because i am very proud of law enforcement stepping in. on february 6th, 2013, that the police commissioners meeting, last month, i gave you paperwork and spoke with all of you about fighting crime as i always do. i would like to thank you for listening and acting quickly. a lot of good police officers answered the call of duty and i want to salute them. i love hard core law enforcement. you guys took a big bite out of crime during the month of february. i want it to continue. i am very proud of law enforcement for stepping hard on crime. i urge you to continue with tough action, it has to be. once again, i say stop and frisk is a must and you know why. hard core law enforcement must continue all crime must be punished don't let anyone get away with anything. keep stepping hard on crime, it is needed on a 24-7 basis. and i know that you need this, i know that you know it, and i know that we need a budget that supports that as well. and i want you to understand that i seriously believe in tactical law enforcement. it is a must as well. and
1st, 2013. we are just triking that. the ordinance will become law 30 days after the mayor signs it since the legislation. so that was just a quick fix up. >> supervisor kim has made a motion to amend. is there a second to the motion? seconded by supervisor cohen. colleagues, without objection that passes. on the underlying ordinance can we take that same house same call? without objection, the ordinance is passed on the first read as amended. item 30. >> item 30 is motion appointing robert bowden, term ending july 17, 2013, to the reentry council. >> roll call vote. >> on item 30, supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. there are nine ayes. >> motion is approved. item 31. >> item 31, motion confirming the mayor's appointment of mel murphy, term ending may 1, 2016, to the port commission. >> colleagues, we have two colleagues who are not with us today and we have been
san francisco, the lgbt elders. i'm an elder law attorney and my focus for a good 50% of my clients is on lgbt issues, financial, health, estate planning, et cetera. and what i see there is a great deal of focus on aids, on invisibility, questions on living alone or together, outliving a partner, on illness and death within our community, on housing and the lack thereof past a certain point if you're not gainfully employed or have a very huge pension from something that you did when you were gainfully employed, you might be out on the streets in san francisco. i have not done much political work here. i have been -- this is a mid-life career change for me. i was a college professor. i was [speaker not understood] at san francisco state when it was largely lesbian. i've been on the aids legal referral panel. in fact, the first work i did as an attorney was at my tree when it was still on henry street. i've worked at the [speaker not understood] nclr elder love forum. i'm past president of the national academy of elder law attorneys, local northern california chapter. i would bring ne
the permits. while it may not be a form law retail the board can consider the arguments made by the neighbors but i would suggest that is the permit that would be on appeal to the board on may 15th, which deals with the actual change of use and the establishment of an oska at that location. additionally, if somehow, they open additional stores such that they have eleven stores operating the day that this comes before the board, then they would be considered formula retail use, the board would apply the law of the day and would i believe, deny the permit because it would not have it would be a formula retail use and not have the appropriate lease authorization and the board has to apply the law of the day when you hear the permit that is before you. so, but it does not sound like that is a possibility given that they don't have enough stores in the pipeline to trigger the threshold in the next couple of months. because of that we found that it is not formula retail. and available for any questions. >> i have a quick question on the pop up stores. what do those count as? >> those are generally
and law degree from berkeley to making sure that our city is sustainable, healthy, and a great place to live. and i see serving on the urban forestry council as a way i can help achieve those goals. so, i thank you for considering me for this position. >> are there any questions? seeing none, is rose hillson here? >>> good afternoon. rose thought she was going to be late. you know you all are going to be here later on this afternoon. >>> i'm sorry. [laughter] >>> sorry about the confusion there. [speaker not understood]. good afternoon, commissioners. i'm a resident and native san franciscan. i grew up in the richmond district and i'm currently eminently qualified for the position, seat 7 on the seat [speaker not understood]. i am a board of supervisors appointee on the council. i'm currently chair of the landmark tree committee. i have been serving the community for over 20 years in the jordan park improvement association, jpia, which puts me in touch with my neighbors. jpia is also one of 48 neighborhood organizations and the coalition for a san francisco neighborhood, csfn, and it
. all improvements subject to the laws and regulations pertaining to the city contracts. and the laws such as san francisco administrative code section 6.22 g do not apply to the event and activities associated with it. ~ but because the city has agreed to reimburse the event authority for all amounts expended on construction contracts, the parties have agreed to apply the provisions of section 6.22 g. there is no reimbursement. the event authority is not being reimbursed one cent for any construction contracts being undertaken. so, all i can say to this committee is the foundation stone upon which the workforce plan was prepared and upon which the event authority agreed to pay prevailing wage and all the other things have been removed. and yet we have still voluntarily agreed to do it. and, so, in the backdrop of that, i really do question the tone here. the tone of innuendo that would try to tell somebody they were not trying to do the right thing. >> so, did you not agree to prevailing wage? >> we agreed to prevailing wage on the basis that we would be reimbursed for construction
and intimidate, but they try to find loopholes in the existing laws. and what we have right now is a last resort attempt to provide some protection to the patients who want to access this clinic and to the men and women who work there. the ordinance that we have -- we are introducing creates a buffer zone, that it provides protection of 25 radius within the entrance of the clinic. it amends the bubble ordinance that was passed by this board in 1993. that bubble ordinance was a good start, but this is needed. let me say that what we are doing is something that we don't do lightly. we recognize the right of people to express free expression, to express their speech. we protect the first amendment in san francisco. but the buffer zone ordinance that we are introducing is one that recognizes that we need strike a balance between the right to free speech and the right of women, especially to access health care. no right is absolute. and the courts have found that buffer zones like the one that san francisco -- that we are introducing today, in fact are narrowly tailored and survive legal scrutiny. th
locales -- local residents. they didn't follow the local letter of the law. we learned from that in the 15 years, 16 years the first source program has been around, that not once has any entity ever been penalized for violations of the first source agreement. ~ is that your understanding as well? >> correct, supervisor. my tenure doesn't go 15 year back, 15 months. at no time has liquidated damages been associated with first source. >> is there a policy within oewd that tries, attempts to avoid having liquidated damages apply? >> i wouldn't say it's a matter of policy, but the goal of city on our office on the employment side is to put san francisco residents to work, not to penalize employers. so, we will frequently use that as leverage as a means to gain employment for san francisco residents. similarly with the mandatory local hiring ordinance, we've been fortunate to date not to have levied any liquidated damages associated with that, but we have used that as a means to put san francisco residents to work successfully. >> so in the case with america's cup since we don't
laws. these are events staging companies. >> is the language that we had in the agreement, though, was that standard prevailing wage language? >> no. it referenced the prevailing wage requirement of the admin code, but not the other provisions of the admin code that pertain to how we enforce prevailing wages on a public work. and it then went on to say that enforcement would be pursuant to the labor code. the labor code provides for the state labor commissioner to enforce. the state labor commissioner is not going to enforce a prevailing wage requirement on a privately funded san francisco project. so, the language could have been better. >> how was that language crafted? how was the process, was olse part half? >> olse was not part of that. ~ so, we requested payroll documents including time cards, check stubs from all the contractors as part of our audit. neither the event authority or hartman would provide olse with a copy of the contract between the event authority and hartman, which was confidential. but both parties agreed that if it contained the prevailing wage requiremen
put something into law and businesses know about it. and that really, not until a business gets to be about 100 employees, do they start having, according to the california employers association sort of in-house human resources person on staff. so this really helped us to sort of demonstrate the complexity. i think our kind of message is with the task force is more regulation may not necessarily be the need to deal with wage test and that we need to strengthen what is there. so that was kind of orientation was to demonstrate the amount of regulation that is currently there. and then i wanted to with the last two items are calendar item march 19th general services agency and contract monitoring division as parts of march as being international women's month for the commissioner on the status of women. they are doing a women's business enterprise workshop for women lbes and sbes and march 13 and march 23, thank you commissioner adams for the connection that bart is holding their revamping a program for small business program. and so they are do{alt+}{alt+shift+}dner kleinwort w
that was filed against him is because the law strictly cites that it has to be an elected official or a department head and bottom-line i was in the military for quite a few years and one of the things i learned is the co is responsible for everything that goes on under his or her command. one of the comments that mr. [inaudible] made were regarding sergeant goss. he talked about all the expertise he had, experience, so forth, but sergeant goss for all his expeer seize cannot answer a simple idr in compliance with the law. some people say i want to embarrass people with my remarks. if the order is embarrassing, it is members of the legal division that have embarrassed the chief, not me. the simple fact that the legal division can't seem to accept a public records request and answer it on a timely basis is unacceptable. and the chief is responsible to see that all of the officers, all of the staff under his command follow the law. in in this case he did not. you can say you're just being picky, but on a nine to one vote turns out i was right, it was not responded to properly
's certainly something that is reflecting the market and not the law. the law says a hundred percent. >> right. is there any data is that we have that suggest that with a market rate if you raised it by $80 that the tenant would leave. is there some kind of progression that shows that. in this current mark, i don't see that. >> right. it is a 20 year period as a pass through and the market rate is what it is. it's not what it is plus $80. i grant you that it's increasing rapidly in the current market. i think the reason property owners don't have that additional amount is because the demand is able to support what it supports and nothing more. but again, as we've looked at the distribution of tenants and how long they have lived in their property and about a quarter of tenants in san francisco have lived there less than two years. those are the ones that are least likely to get the full amount t vast amount of rent control in san francisco are below market. >> thank you. >> thank you, new further questions? thank you. i believe that is conclusion of the departmental conversations. for this po
of the matrix and we are recommended oppose. what this does in the p3 law that the transportation authority in conjunction with cal transfollowed for the drive project, there is in essence two state agencies that take a look at a public, private partnership application and one is the public investment, or the private investment, i forget, what it stands for, but it is a function of the transportation secretary's office. and it was a committee that was supposed to review, proposals and make comments. secondarily, the state transportation commission is empowered to authorize a public private partnership in lease and contract. this bill, highens the ability to actually act as an initial hurtle and they have a binding, and the binding ability to reject the public, private partnership proposal before it goes to the transportation commission, we think that is not what the original framers of the particular p3 law intended and it does add an extra burden to the process and we are recommending oppose to that. ab 863 is another one that we are recommending oppose, it seems like it was a measure that
's not a hard firm, it's a guideline. both in abc law and i think in the planning code. the map you were given, this is completely inaccurate. i am not talking about missing one or two. there is one block where she shows five licenses and there is nine. and on california street there are two bars next to each other. and also eating places not shown. california street needs to be included in this. and the rest of ncd from california south. because it's very serious now. and all of that area. and california street i understand has more proposed. i keep hearing. in fact i wonder why they wouldn't take a contract for the (inaudible) unless they want to turn that into a nightclub space. my sister took the bus the other night, the 19 on a saturday night about 11:30. the bus kept stopping. huge crowds outside of these bars. she said, why would anyone come? well, they don't but these youth. and now every bar they are all lined up out there. it's impossible for this number of bars to actually survive based on the people that live in the neighborhood or nearby. they are bussing people in from richmond a
, lotering, it is defined as to stand idly about and linger without lawful business and prohibts to the sidewalkses adjacent to the business as depicted on form 257. no person under the age of 21 shall sell or deliver alcoholic beverages. number seven, all sales and service staff within 90 days of hire shall complete the abc lead class and responsible service. the copy of the certificate should be kept to the premises and be given on request. this business shall be conducted at all times in a manner that will allow them to be easily identifiable as employees by law enforcement. employee clothing shall feature the name of the business. the sales of alcoholic beverages for off-sale conception is strictly prohibited. the licensee should provide one security personnel on the exterior of the premises. the interior should be staffed appropriately to control the patrons and stop the disturbances. the special events should be staffed at one security guard per 75 patrons. further licensee agrees to honor the request of law enforcement if additional security becomes necessary. number eleve
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 171 (some duplicates have been removed)